Creationists dug out a living dinosaur and were able to publish it in a leading magazine?!

[Shemjaza]

You haven't been paying attention.

The assertion of "common sense" without specifics, in the face of consistent evidence is exactly as valid as just saying "nuh-uh".

 

[Kenny'sID]

So, to sum up, you're argument for why this can't happen is basically: 'Nuh-uh'.

The assertion of "common sense" without specifics, in the face of consistent evidence is exactly as valid as just saying "nuh-uh".

Show me proof soft tissue can remain just that for 30 million yrs?

 

[Shemjaza]

Show me proof soft tissue can remain just that for 30 million yrs?

Preserved, minralised, not unchanged and fresh.

Also, this came from me linking you a scientific paper about exactly that.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Preserved, minralised, not unchanged and fresh.

Also, this came from me linking you a scientific paper about exactly that.

Then just another big 'Nuh-uh' to what I claimed, and no proof otherwise?

 

[Shemjaza]

Then just another big 'Nuh-uh' to what I claimed, and no proof otherwise?

No... It's a literal fossil in sedimentary rock bracketed by igneous rock that can be dated with radio isotopes.

Did you just try a "I know you are, but what an I?"? Really?

 

[Kenny'sID]

No... It's a literal fossil in sedimentary rock bracketed by igneous rock that can be dated with radio isotopes.

Did you just try a "I know you are, but what an I?"? Really?

No, that doesn't even resemble what I said. lol It's so far off I first thought you were answering the wrong post.

I answered the same way you two were answering me, and it appears your answer is still 'Nuh-uh', that is unless you can prove what you're presenting is accurate

I think you are aware of the arguments against the dating, and I'm certainly not taking your word for it..

 

[Shemjaza]

No, that doesn't even resemble what I said. lol It's so far off I first thought you were answering the wrong post.

I answered the same way you two were answering me, and it appears your answer is still 'Nuh-uh', that is unless you can prove what you're presenting is accurate

I think you are aware of the arguments against the dating, and I'm certainly not taking your word for it..

So multiple people submit published scientific conclusions and evidence... and you respond with exclusively laughter and denial.

And you think that's an equivalent exchange?

 

[Jimmy D]

I think you are aware of the arguments against the dating, and I'm certainly not taking your word for it..

Are you? (Edit: are you aware of the arguments?)

Let me guess.... "Assumptions!"

 

[lasthero]

So multiple people submit published scientific conclusions and evidence... and you respond with exclusively laughter and denial.

And you think that's an equivalent exchange?

It’s the best he’s got.

 

[Kenny'sID]

So multiple people submit published scientific conclusions and evidence... and you respond with exclusively laughter and denial.

And you think that's an equivalent exchange?

Except for one thing I did not respond exclusively with laughter/denial. Why are you responding exclusively with false accusations?

Now stick with the subject and prove the dating process is infallible. I've seen to much to just buy this stuff without question.

Sorry but your "equivalent exchange" comment, under the circumstances, really is laughable, so don't blame me when I do.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Are you? (Edit: are you aware of the arguments?)

Let me guess.... "Assumptions!"

Someone finally gets it.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Except for one thing I did not respond exclusively with laughter/denial. Why are you responding exclusively with false accusations?

Now stick with the subject and prove the dating process is infallible. I've seen to much to just buy this stuff without question.

Sorry but your "equivalent exchange" comment, under the circumstances, really is laughable, so don't blame me when I do.

 

[Shemjaza]

Except for one thing I did not respond exclusively with laughter/denial. Why are you responding exclusively with false accusations?

Now stick with the subject and prove the dating process is infallible. I've seen to much to just buy this stuff without question.

Sorry but your "equivalent exchange" comment, under the circumstances, really is laughable, so don't blame me when I do.

Asking forward evidence or details, then laughing and centring them is all you have done.

If you can list post number in this thread where you respond with any actual evidence or analysis I will apologise. Till then, I am confident that any readers will see that you have nothing but arrogance and ignorance.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Asking forward evidence or details, then laughing and centring them is all you have done.

If you can list post number in this thread where you respond with any actual evidence or analysis I will apologise. Till then, I am confident that any readers will see that you have nothing but arrogance and ignorance.

You accused me of some "I know you are but what am I" nonsense comment, and I told you that didn't happen, and laughed.

I also laughed at the idea soft tissue could last 30 million yrs. Both very laughable then and now. Now what were you trying to turn that into? Just more of a waste of our time?

 

[Shemjaza]

You accused me of some "I know you are but what am I" nonsense comment, and I told you that didn't happen, and laughed.

I also laughed at the idea soft tissue could last 30 million yrs. Both very laughable then and now. Now what were you trying to turn that into? Just more of a waste of our time?

Your response has been laughter and denial... someone characterised your response as "Nuh-uh", which while insulting is accurate with regards to the content of your arguments.

Then as a response to a detailed scientific paper about minralised soft tissue fossils you responded with:
"Then just another big 'Nuh-uh' to what I claimed, and no proof otherwise?"

This is clearly an attempt to re frame the posting of detailed evidence as equivalent to your denial, and to throw the same insult back.

So, yes, you most definitely used the "I know you are, but what am I?"

 

[Kenny'sID]

So, yes, you most definitely used the "I know you are, but what am I?"

If you think I'm going to get into a no I didn't/yes you did thing over this, nope.

Think I'll stick with my gut on the soft tissue, but your welcome to prove me wrong, something I can't seem to get you to do..

 

[Shemjaza]

If you think I'm going to get into a no I didn't/yes you did thing over this, nope.

I explained my reasoning, there;s nothing more to be said.

Think I'll stick with my gut on the soft tissue, but your welcome to prove me wrong, something I can't seem to get you to do..

The paper describes how they identified it and how they demonstrated that some of the original chitin was present in the mineralised remains.

So we have some scientists studying fossils, animals and chemical compositions... I'm at a loss as to why i should doubt that when all we have is Kenny'sID's gut feeling, presumably informed by his religious preferences.

 

[USincognito]

Gut feeling aka truthiness.
Truthiness - Wikipedia

 

[Kenny'sID]

I explained my reasoning, there;s nothing more to be said.

What generally follows that is silence.

The paper describes how they identified it and how they demonstrated that some of the original chitin was present in the mineralised remains.

So we have some scientists studying fossils, animals and chemical compositions... I'm at a loss as to why i should doubt that when all we have is Kenny'sID's gut feeling, presumably informed by his religious preferences.

I'm not asking you to doubt a thing. You may take their word for what appears to me to be a beyond ridiculous find if you like. There are a few basics that make me not believe evolution at all, while I also think it is ridiculous. It's the same with this, when a few things just don't fit at all, and are so ridiculous they are laughable, just like, say, flat earth, I don't concern myself with it too much, but you are welcome to try to convince me if you like, Remember, you were the one that pounced on me about my opinion.

If you all don't think there is anything to gut feeling or common sense, for one, that doesn't surprise me in the least, but some people do. The next time I see assumptions used to fill in the gaps of evolution, I'll point them out to you, refer to them as the gut feeling they are, remind you of this conversation and watch you squirm a bit. But until then I guess this is what you get when you ridicule someone for doing the same as most everyone does in their lives, including yourselves.

But I know how it goes, it's like often happens, it's ok for one side to use something like this, at least until using the same way of reasoning works against you...so goes arguments with certain people.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Gut feeling aka truthiness.
Truthiness - Wikipedia

Didn't I ask you a question earlier, and got no reply, or was that another thread?